RAF Stretched too far?
 

This is my first post on PPRUNE, but would really appreciate comments from anyone currently serving in the RAF. I have been asked to give a presentation on the subject 'RAF Stretched too far?', and thought the best way to get opinions is to ask those in the know!

I'm definately not asking other people to research facts and figures for me, but any opinions or examples on the subject will be greatfully received.

Short and simple.............Yes

Give a presentation, or write an article? Journo warning!:hmm:

Simple answer, No.

According to Air Command we have the right resources in the right places in sufficient quantities.












hat, coat, duck

who is you aidience
 

the material you need will depend on your audience, the question is too broad. suggest you listen to Swiss Des this afternoon for some pointers.

Have you only just been born?

The news has been full of RAF overstretched stories for the past few years. I would suggest you narrow the subject, because apart from fast pointy things I think every other facet of the RAF is hurting...mmm, apart from maybe bosses too - we've got lots, enough to make bureaucracy and micromanagement as big a threat as more obvious enemies.

The news today about Nimrod should provide some background. Other areas of pressure are the air transport fleet and support helicopters - you know, the ones doing the bulk of the flying in the Gulf.

With the BOI from the Nimrod just about to report, I thought some members of the press would be looking for a slant. I have to say, and I rarely give advice, but if this is the best "cover story" you can come up with you are most definitley in the wrong trade. E- for effort mate.

Controversially, you could also ask "Defence Budget - Where Does it Go?"

To include pi$$-poor procurement and a military with its hands tied by contracts, and a contract-bidding process, that would make any business in the free market choke!

:*You've come to the wrong conclusion mate, I'm RAF and so is the audience. I have my own opinions on overstretch, I'm just after some other thoughts on the subject...

The stretch varies though. SH, AT, Regt, MR2 etc, all stretched. Typhoon force - still knocking off early on Fridays, I expect.

99 - I suggest you don't ask here.

There's an irony on here that isn't lost on me. It surrounds certain folks that squeal about a lack of understanding or how nobody outside the ranks feels their pain, but then squeal even louder when somebody asks a few questions about it.

From my experience, you should get a few PMs from the constructive element that frequent these forums. They'll also give you the lowdown on which members to ignore/avoid.

I suggest your further your research down those channels and ignore those who think you don't have a right to ask. The added irony is that said members are generally well off the mark with their own comments - like some of them already have been on this thread.

Google RAF and overstretch.

The official line is that the RAF is 'stretched but not over-stretched'.

There was a recent article in one of the spotter mags saying that the RAF is certainly over-stretched, and may even be broken.

Not according to C-inC Air Command at ISk the other week - apparently, we are not broken, simply stretched in a few areas!

:ugh:

Oh yeah... and some of the folks in here don't credit you with any intelligence. They also love to state the obvious.

what do you think!!!! nice try mate:ugh:

"what so you think!!!! nice try mate"

?

Robert Fox in the Grauniad: Nimrod disaster no enigma

......Running behind the report on the Nimrod crash is the story of an ancient aircraft of about 30 years of continuous service, which has been bodged and converted many times over and is now doing a job for which it was never designed.

Primarily designed to carry out anti-submarine patrols over the North Sea, this model of the Nimrod, the MR2, was due out of service years ago. The fuselage is basically that of the old De Havilland Comet, the world's first jet airliner that took to the skies over half a century ago. The Nimrod fleet is supposed to undergo special Nimrod Safety Case reviews on an almost annual basis, plus a special Nimrod Ageing Aircraft Review. Neither identified the danger of the hot air pipe contacting high pressure fuel leaks in the 'dry bay' area in front of No 7 fuel tank.

Nimrod MR2 is due to be replaced by the new MR4A version which won't be fully up and running until 2012. The accident report published today by the RAF Board of Inquiry says all MR2s should be out of service in 2010, but the RAF has said some will have to go on for two more years at least.

The story of the Kandahar crash raises some big questions for the services and the MoD, which the government seems reluctant to address - as ever. It is a story of an ageing piece of equipment stretched to its limit, and reading between the lines of the report stretching the patience of its air and ground crews. The report states coyly in a number of passages that there has been an abnormal level of resignations and retirements from the Nimrod air and ground crews in the year since XV230 broke up in mid-air, west of Kandahar.

All three services have to put up with a catalogue of aged, in some cases exhausted, equipment. They have to work on budgets barely adequate for the forces of a Britain entirely at peace - instead, they are engaged in two war-like operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and counter-terrorist and surveillance operations in nearly a dozen countries.

One of the best, or worst examples, was the aircraft that refuelled the ill-fated Nimrod XV230, a converted Lockheed Tristar. The RAF bought the Tristars secondhand at the time of the Falklands conflict 25 years ago - and they are due to run on to 2015 at least. They were supposed to be replaced by a freighter/tanker version of the A330 Airbus to be acquired on a complicated Public Finance Initiative for financing known as the Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft programme, costed at around £13bn over just under 30 years - the biggest private finance initiative undertaken by the MoD.

Funny old thing, we haven't anything officially about this programme for a year or more now. Perhaps it won't happen, after all......................

Overstretched?
 

Perhaps you should start your study with the comments fromWilliam Rees-Mogg in Monday's Times http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle2943261.ece
Everyone knows we are overstretched, but people have banged on about it in here and elsewhere for ages. New Labour have conveniently ignored things for ages and despite the statements by retired senior officers, they feel no shame that our chaps live in accommodation that is unsuitable for asylum seekers, feign pride at the immense sacrifice by our people, allow charity to attempt to provide assets for the rehabilitation of wounded servicemen and women that the State should provide in recognition of their condition, constantly hack at our ever-changing budgets and force some incredibly motivated and selfless people to live in an environment where they and their families have to cope with the destabilising effects of change, the rumours of it and New Labour's love of playing world policeman on the cheap. Somebody once told me that this isn't a cheap business, but that doesn't stop GB and his cronies from trying to make it so. The UOR process is propping up an exhausted procurement system that relies on outdated planning assumptions. It's fortunate for the Government that they got caught taking cash from questionable sources so that they can quietly ignore the Armed Forces again.

RAF...Now let me think:rolleyes: Was that the establishment that went the same way as Northern Rock?
ROYAL VIRGIN AIR FORCE PLC.
CinC Sir Richard Branson :oh:

CAS is concerned to keep a balanced force for both now and in the future. In a 'limited' conflict situation some assets are hard pressed and some hardly at all.

The Iraq theatre is has a lower CAS requirement than Afg but both have a common AT need. The SH force is divided and hard pressed in both theatres. There are other assets that are not required in either theatre - E3, F3, Typhoon (at the moment), Hawk, Domine etc.

If the situation changed then the resource usage would change. The trick is to maintain a capability - F3 Air Defence - whilst not completely exhausting the JFH.

The Jaguar Force had no role in the near term and no future in the medium term; they were disbanded. Apparently 2 GR4 Sqns are to be offered up. This may be under the same consideration as the Jaguar Force but recognising that they may have a role in the medium to longer term.

The trick is to maintain capability and the ability to expand and take a capability holiday where possible.